Table 5 - uploaded by Brian Ballantyne
Content may be subject to copyright.
Context in source publication
Similar publications
Le réseau de voirie français est long de plus d’un million de kilomètres. À neuf, ce patrimoine est estimé à deux mille milliards d’euros. Son entretien est le deuxième poste de dépense des communes, après l’éducation. Malheureusement, chacun le constate, la voirie se dégrade. Avec l’avancée des technologies numériques, ne peut-on pas optimiser la...
Citations
... The CP is recorded in the Indian Lands Registry System (ILRS), administered by the federal government. The system underpins security of tenure and clarifies who has the right to possess, occupy, transfer, subdivide, use and develop a parcel of land (Fligg and Robinson, 2019;Ballantyne and Ballantyne, 2016). ...
... Formal systems have proven to better levels of community wellbeing (CWB) 38 (Aubin, 1996;Brinkhurst, 2013;Fligg and Robinson, 2019). Across 169 First Nation communities in Ontario and British Columbia (BC) there was a positive relationship between formality and CWBa 10% increase in formal housing led to CWB increases of 0.83 points for Ontario communities and 0.9 points for BC communities (Ballantyne and Ballantyne, 2016). Viewed through a lens of economic theory, formality increases investment incentives, lowers transactions costs, increases bargaining efficiency, internalizes negative externalities, and increases economic efficiency. ...
Curve Lake First Nation (CLFN) in Ontario has a mainland Reserve area of 649 ha and a Reserve population of 1368; 768 of whom are CLFN members and 600 of whom are seasonal or permanent non-members. Land management is an amalgam - there is much formal land tenure through Certificates of Possession (CPs) and leases but little formal land use planning. A desire by CLFN (Chief and Council, Lands Committee, Lands Manager) for more formal land use planning drove this research. In 2019, 160 CLFN members participated in a land-use study. The results were aggregated into four categories: those that hold land (CP holders), those that do not hold land (non-CP holders), members living on-Reserve, and members living off-Reserve. CP holders and non-CP holders agreed that all parcels should be managed/used according to community values. There was similar agreement between on-Reserve members and off-Reserve members. However, there was little understanding of existing land tenure and land management regimes, and much uncertainty about the distinction between formal and informal land-use. Further analysis revealed, on the one hand, that there was a significant difference in knowledge about how Reserve land may be used between CP holders and non-CP holders, and between on-Reserve and off-Reserve members. We refer to this difference as a disconnect and found a correlation between informality and disconnect. On the other hand, there was no disconnect about the need for formal land-use policies and bylaws, which finding supports the CLFN community as it debates a land-use plan.
... Our understanding and awareness of Indigenous lands is limited, in part, due to heterogeneity in governance and land tenure among these land systems and how it subsequently affects socio-economic development. While literature abounds on the significance of governance, land tenure, and socio-economic development in a land management system (e.g., by De Soto, 2000;Appiah-Adu and Bawumia, 2015;;FAO, 1999FAO, , 2002Ballantyne et al., 2014;Ballantyne and Ballantyne, 2016;Alcantara, 2003;Flanagan, 2015, and Flanagan and Harding, 2016, empirical evidence is lacking that describes the relationship among these attributes that have led to heterogeneous land management systems and differences in well-being among communities on Indigenous lands. ...
... While Flanagan (2016) investigated drivers for 21 higher CWB scoring communities by governance, property rights and economics, Flanagan did not "distinguish among different types of non-Indian-Act government" (Flanagan, 2016, pg 12). Armstrong (2001Armstrong ( , 1999; Ballantyne et al., 2012Ballantyne et al., , 2016Ballantyne et al., , 2017; AANDC (2013b) also found that drivers of higher scoring CWB communities are associated with property rights 34 , geographic location (Fig. 5), revenue sources, and health. ...
... Inferences suggest formality in property rights and location to markets with positive economic growth and possibly higher CWB. 33 Knauer (2010) FAO, 1999, 2002, Ballantyne and Ballantyne, 2016Knauer, 2010;AANDC, 2013b, pg 3). This assessment is supported by: 1) higher CWB average scores were observed in the order (from lowest to highest) in IALM, FNLM and SGLM communities respectively, 2) SGLM communities observed a history of the highest average CWB scores, 3) First Nation communities under FNLM on the average showed improvement in CWB scores both prior to transition and after, and 4) higher levels of CWB scores were found associated with communities that have a formal property rights system. ...
The presented paper synthesizes and reviews the history of Fist Nation land management, forming the background of three land management regimes types; the Indian Act land management (IALM), First Nations land management (FNLM) and frameworks of self-government land management (SGLM). The three regimes are compared to the Community Well-Being (CWB) index, being a measure of socio-economic development of communities across Canada. Statistical analysis was done on CWB scores by land management regime to determine if there are significant differences between land management regime and CWB scores, and where rates of increase in CWB are found. Results of these efforts identified five key findings; 1) while higher levels of CWB score are found in all three land-management regimes, there is an increasing trajectory in CWB average scores from IALM, to FNLM, to SGLM communities; 2) there is a significant statistical difference between CWB average scores of the IALM with FNLM and SGLM land management regimes, 3) higher levels of CWB scores were found among communities having a formal versus an informal land tenure system; 4) rates of increase in CWB scores were found in higher scoring communities, however, the rates were higher at the lower quartile; 5) increase in CWB scores was observed in FNLM communities both prior and after transition to FNLM, however, the rate of increase slowed down after transition.
Land management is a pressing issue for reconciling and reconnecting First Nations with their land. Many First Nations have taken more control and responsibility over the management of their land that is key to their well-being. Currently, two legislative pathways (e.g., the First Nation Land Management (FNLM) regime and frameworks of self-government) provide more control by First Nations over their land outside of the Indian Act, however, there are gaps in societies’ understanding about the relationship of First Nation land management (in the broader sense) and their well-being.
The overarching goal of the dissertation, seeks to improve societies’ understanding about the relationship between First Nation land management (broadly defined, including land management systems, property rights systems, land-use policies and planning) and First Nation well-being. Chapter 2 contributes by asking the question: “does the land-management regime of a First Nation correlate with differing levels of community well-being among First Nations as measured using the community well-being (CWB) index?”. It also investigates if there have been temporal effects by asking the question: “do First Nation communities experience different CWB trajectories when under a particular land management regime when they transition from one land management regime to another?” First Nation communities that have more control over managing their land have on average higher CWB scores, however, a community under any land management regime (e.g., under the Indian Act, or sub-set of the Indian Act ‘Reserve Land and Environment Management Program’ (RLEMP), Framework Agreement on First Nation Land Management Act (formerly First Nations Land Management Act (FNLM)) or a framework of self-government) could achieve a high CWB score (e.g., above the non-Indigenous average) depending on key economic factors (e.g., location of a community to an economic area). Regardless of CWB scores a land management regime is crucial to First Nation cultural well-being that may include pathways or mechanisms to develop formal community objectives and policies on land-use practices (e.g., on land relationships and stewardship).
Building on Chapter 2, Chapter 3 looks deeper into First Nation land management, land-use practices, policy and planning, and property rights through collaboration with Curve Lake First Nation. Chapter 3 investigates by First Nation member-type (i.e., land holder vs non-land holder, and ‘on’ vs ‘off-reserve’ members) land management knowledge, and the impact member type has on land management and land-use practices. To achieve the objective of Chapter 3, a social survey was created in collaboration with Curve Lake First Nation to investigate formal and informal land-use practices and policy in land management, and whether there was a gap between members “wants and needs” regarding what should happen according to (formal) policy or process and what actually happens on the ground (informal). Although results from Chapter 3 found a correlation of land holder/non-land holder disconnect with uncertainty regarding policy on land use-practices that suggested a need for formal land-use policy and planning, the results also suggested CP holders and non-CP holders agreed that all parcels should be managed and used according to community values.
Chapter 4 takes a step toward filling the gap in societies’ understanding by utilizing the knowledge and data from Chapters 2 and 3 in the development of a First Nation land-use voting model to investigate how formal land use policy on individual support for land policy and community land objectives could be conceptualized as a collective well-being. Chapter 4 investigated the objective by asking research questions on “how different member-levels of propensity for land information knowledge, ambition, stewardship, and how they collaborate affect formal land-use plan and potential land-policy adoption”, and secondly “how relationships and changes in members’ knowledge and attitudes affect support of formal land-use policy and its potential adoption?” Responses to the Curve Lake First Nation social survey was further coded for member responses on land related questions about their community, and outside community, on systems of land management, property rights, land-use policy and planning, and opinions on well-being that could be used to empirically inform an agent-based model called the ‘First Nation Land-Use Voting Model’. Model results suggest with greater support for community specific objectives for a balance in socio-economic and cultural well-being, there is greater support for the adoption of formal land-use policy and planning.
Land-use change is mainly driven by factors of socioeconomic development, a relationship between economic activity and social life to improve the well-being of people. The indicator of socioeconomic development used for Indigenous communities in Canada is the Community Well-Being Index (CWB). A CWB score for a community is based on income, education, housing, and labour. The relationship of these CWB variables to socioeconomic drivers of land-use change such as demography, technology, industry, and employment is complex; modelling these variables will explain the relationship. An integrated agent-based model on land-use decision-making that will assist First Nations to understand the relationship of CWB variables to socioeconomic drivers of land-use change is being developed in collaboration with Curve Lake First Nation, a community 120 km's northeast of Toronto. The model will be validated if it simulates a realistic-like scenario, such that it assists First Nations in land-use decision-making.
